Meeting of the Parliament
Meeting date: Thursday, February 24, 2011
Official Report
1075KB pdf
Point of Order
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. It is a point of order under rule 9C.3, which governs the passage of hybrid bills through Parliament. Part of that rule requires that the financial memorandum that accompanies such a bill
“shall set out the best estimates of the administrative, compliance and other costs to which the provisions of the Bill would give rise, best estimates of ... timescales ... and an indication of the margins of uncertainty”.
This week, the Finance Committee met in private to consider an additional liability that the Government has identified in relation to the additional road bridge that it wishes to build over the Forth. It now appears from BP, the operator of the pipeline in question, that discussions have been held on the issue for months, and well in advance of the Forth Crossing Bill being brought to Parliament. No opportunity was given for public scrutiny of the matter by the hybrid bill committee, the Finance Committee or the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee at the time.
I ask you to consider whether the financial memorandum to the Forth Crossing Bill has fully complied with rule 9C.3 and to review rule 15.1, which establishes the presumption that committees should meet in public. Does clearer guidance need to be provided on the basis on which private meetings can be held to avoid any assumption that something as traditional as a good old-fashioned cover-up could be going on?
With respect, the two matters to which Mr Harvie refers are matters for the relevant committees. If he has concerns about the way in which they have conducted their business, he should take them up with their conveners.
I am sorry, Presiding Officer; that may be accurate as far as meetings in private are concerned, but it does not address my point about the passage of hybrid bills and the compliance of the financial memorandum to the Forth Crossing Bill with rule 9C.3. Given that the Government knew at the time that negotiations had been taking place between Transport Scotland and BP, and that that information was not included in the bill documents, would you please review that rule and ask whether the hybrid bill complied with it?
The answer to that is no. That is a matter for the committee’s convener in the first instance. If Mr Harvie has further concerns, he should take them up with the convener. If that does not satisfy him, he should then write to me.
12:35
Meeting suspended until 14:15.
14:15
On resuming—